Kenya’s High Court has affirmed that WhatsApp messages and SMS conversations can form legally binding evidence of a contract, even where parties never signed a written agreement.
In a judgment delivered on January 19, 2026, the High Court sitting in Siaya dismissed an appeal in a dispute involving the leasing of an ultrasound machine, and held that the parties’ WhatsApp and SMS correspondence captured and proved the terms of their oral deal.
The dispute: a deal made by phone, backed by WhatsApp
The case arose from a Small Claims Court matter where Kennedy Okoth (claimant) sued Fredrick Ochiel (respondent in the lower court, appellant on appeal) for KSh 145,000, alleging the parties agreed orally that Ochiel would lease Okoth’s ultrasound machine at KSh 1,000 per day for 145 days.
Okoth testified that after initial phone calls in September 2024, Ochiel collected the machine and used it, but later failed to pay as agreed and did not return the equipment. He told the court that the amount accrued to KSh 145,000, and that the appellant had only paid KSh 5,000.
Ochiel disputed the claim, arguing there was no written contract and denying that the alleged payment terms were agreed. He maintained the machine did not work properly and claimed he returned it later.
High Court: contracts don’t have to be written
At the heart of the appeal was a simple question: Was there a contract at all?
The High Court held that oral agreements made in good faith can be legally binding, as long as the claimant can prove the contract in court. The judge noted that a contract need not be written, but must meet basic contract requirements such as offer, acceptance, consideration, and capacity.
Importantly, the court found that someone relying on an oral agreement may prove it using surrounding evidence, including text messages, WhatsApp chats, emails, witnesses and conduct of parties.
WhatsApp messages captured the terms and “bound the parties”
After reviewing the record and the digital correspondence presented, the judge concluded there was a clear “meeting of minds” between the parties.
The court found the WhatsApp and SMS exchanges showed discussions about:
- daily charges for the machine
- promises to send money on specific dates
- requests to pay at least part of the outstanding debt
- ongoing pressure to return the machine
The judge ruled that the terms of the oral agreement were captured in the correspondence and that the SMS and WhatsApp messages bound the parties.
In addition, the appellant’s own witness statement confirmed he collected the machine and paid KSh 5,000, reinforcing the existence of a commercial arrangement between the two.
Digital evidence: appellant lost the right to object
One key issue raised by the appellant was that the WhatsApp and SMS evidence lacked a supporting certificate under Section 106B of the Evidence Act.
However, the High Court noted that the appellant had initially filed a preliminary objection raising the issue — but withdrew it and proceeded with the hearing. He also did not object when the messages were produced in evidence during trial.
As a result, the judge held that the appellant was deemed to have accepted the communications and that the admissibility requirements for digital evidence had been satisfied.
Courts won’t rewrite bad bargains
The appellant also argued the amount claimed was excessive, especially when compared to the cost of purchasing a new ultrasound machine.
But the High Court was clear: where parties freely enter a contract, courts do not intervene to rewrite terms unless illegality, fraud, coercion, oppression, or unconscionability is proven. The court cited established precedent that courts are not in the business of rewriting contracts.
Final decision: appeal dismissed
The High Court upheld the Small Claims Court decision, finding the appellant acted in bad faith by receiving the machine, using it, failing to pay, and failing to return it as required.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Why this matters: your chats can become your contract
The judgment reinforces a growing legal reality in Kenya’s digital economy: business deals made informally through WhatsApp can carry the same legal consequences as written contracts.
In practical terms:
- If your messages show agreement on price, timelines, services, or delivery, a court can treat that as contractual proof.
- “No written contract” is not a guaranteed defence where WhatsApp messages demonstrate offer, acceptance, and conduct consistent with a deal.
- People doing business through informal channels should treat digital conversations as official records.
As WhatsApp continues to power trade, services, and everyday commercial agreements across Kenya, the High Court’s message is simple: your messages are not just conversation — they can be enforceable commitments.
